Does this data make an early election less likely?
July 29th, 2007
Could Labour be doing less well than the headline figures suggest?
If Gordon is thinking about a 2007 general election then every bit of data will be scrutinised to spot the trends so he can be absolutely sure that Labour would be heading for victory with a comfortable majority.
The above table has been clipped from the full data from ICM’s Guardian poll this week that had Labour’s margin down a point but still with a healthy 6% lead. What it shows is the view of people who said they actually voted last time for one of the three main parties and how their voting intentions have changed since.
Make no mistake - this is not good news for the Tories but it does suggest that the situation might not be quite as bleak as some headlines have suggested.
Cameron’s party’s retained vote proportion of 91% is at its lowest level than in any Guardian ICM poll this year. In January it was at 96%. But the Tories are still picking up more Labour and Lib Dem 2005 voters than they are losing so that overall amongst this group they are up.
Labour is doing substantially better on these figures than in any other Guardian ICM poll this year but it is still a net loser amongst 2005 voters
The Lib Dem retention figure is bigger than it has been in other ICM Guardian polls this year but still, overall, it is a net loser.
The big caveat about taking this data is that it is not the full sample. It only includes those who said they voted for the three main parties and does not take into account those who voted for SNP, PC, UKIP, Green or any other party at the last election. It also does not include those who for whatever reason did not vote in 2005 but intend to do so next time.
But you are looking at the intentions of those who said they were in the 61% of the electorate that actually voted in May 2005.
This week two pollsters who have not figured much since Gordon Brown became prime minister will be publishing results. The Independent’s Communicate Research has not carried out a survey since before the succession of Gordon while Populus for the Times just had the poll taken during the first weekend afterwards and which had a 3% Labour lead. These two follow a fairly similar approach to ICM.
Since Gordon came to power there have been four ICM polls, three from YouGov, one from Ipsos-Mori and the one from Populus. It will be good to get a different view.
Election date betting is here with 2007 now down to 4/1. In my betting I am now reducing my spread position on the number of weeks until the general election.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
This may all be tied up with the Brown bounce.
Imagine a group of Labour-supporting but anti-Blair voters who abstained last time over Iraq (or ID cards or cash-for-honours). These people coming home would contribute to the above figures and the Brown bounce.
Incidentally, around 54% voted for the three main parties in 2005.
With all the mutterings against Cameron, has anything been heard from recently demoted serial plotter and ex-Portallista Francis Maude?
Is it confirmed that Graham Brady was one of the MPs who signed the 22 committee letter now then? Obviously he’s decided to use the Sunday papers to have another go. One would think that, whatever they think of his views, Conservatives would have had enough of his sort. Can’t have a chance in elections with people who actively try to work towards defeat.
I think Mike’s cautionary note is fair - people who don’t vote in one election often don’t vote in the next, even if they say they will. There is also another factor to consider in the ICM data which could point either way - the proportion of Tories who say they are certain they’ll vote (67%) is higher than Labour voters (54%). This is allowed for by ICM’s weighting (if you say you’re 80% sure to vote, they weight you by 0.8) but obviously it can change.
You can see this as evidence that the Tories will actually vote in greater numbers on the day (and this could well mean that they’ll continue to do better in low-turnout local by-elections), or as evidence that Labour still has the potential to go higher when there’s actually an election going on, especially if it’s close. But on a technical note it should mean that the Tories have a relatively better CR poll next week, since (IIRC) CR *excludes* anyone who isn’t 100% certain.
On the two to six “leadership change” letters to the 1922 committee, a minor oddity that I don’t understand: according to what loked like an authoritative comment (can’t remember the source now, but it was a pundit stating it as fact), the letters were written over a month ago, before DC’s recent troubles. I wonder why, and also wonder why the 1922 committee decided to release the information only recently.
Off on holiday for a week - so long everyone.
From previous thread late last night - great to hear from you again Patrick - although I’m not sure there’s any such thing as ‘moderate Labour’ these days!
Glad to hear things are better for you personally - we are all rooting for you on here.
I guess Graham Brady was an obvious - and overlooked - letter writer. Does anyone know who is the leader of the Westminster branch of the Graham Brady fan club? Possibly the second culprit.
I’d hazard that this is suggestive of perhaps two things…
First off that the soft left (much of which was at best reluctantly supportive of Labour at the last election or either sat on theirs hands or actually swung to the LibDems, Greens, Respect etc…) may be idenitifying with Brown and Labour again (something I always thought a strong possibility after Blair’s departure) and the polls could be reflecting this… it of course remains to be seen how long this can be maintained.
The second point is that the data could also suggest that the “Brown Bounce” itself is to a signficant extent drawn from essentially “soft” support (the notion of “giving Brown a chance” – a sentiment you hear a lot). And that this “soft” support could be drawn from those unlikley to vote being picked up by the pollsters in response to the media attention focused on Brown in recent weeks, what would be very interesting is if this was the case with Cameron and the Conservatives eightreen months ago…
So IMHO I think the data suggests, both the return of those disaffected Labour voters to idenfitying with the party again and at the same time the overall softness of the “bounce” as it stands now.
Some of those disaffected voters who have returned to the Labour fold must have been hoping for a change in Britains relationship with the US, now that ‘poodle’ Blair has gone. Not so, it seems. On his visit to Washington, the Prime Minister said:
“And because of the values we share, the relationship with the United States is not only strong but can become stronger in the years ahead.”
(BBC News Website)
O/T “Britishness” doesn’t apply to ALL of Britain, apparently. From the BBC News Website again:
“Proposals to fly the Union flag every day on public buildings are set not to apply to Scotland.”
Well, that’s a surprise!
5 - I think the reason he was “overlooked” was because of the timing issue identified in 4. The press spin on the letters was that Cameron was in serious trouble because they were a response to the plummeting polls and poor by-election results.
When in fact they were almost certainly prompted by disquiet over the non-issue of grammar schools.
7 - To be honest i think it’s a case (as Anthony Wells has suggested) of voters of all kinds projecting their hopes onto a new Prime Minister… I think this is as true of the disaffected “soft left” voters (Guardian Man and Woman - GMW ) as it is of others, not least the essentially disinterested elements of the electorate who may be registering in polls now as a result of the media coverage of Brown… I stress the word “may”.
It’s a fair point that Brown’s done very little substantive to suggest a return to the sort of agenda that would satisfy these disaffected voters of the “soft left”… however he and his ministers have been very effective in providing a change in tone… remains to be seen if that is all that’s needed or if a failure to embark on any real change in approach will lead to these voters drifting away again, be that to other parties or into abstention…
One thing I would be more confident of is that if these polls are indeed picking up essentially disinterested sections of the electorate that are merely responding as a reflection of the media attention afforded Brown… then these could well drift away.
re 4. Thanks Nick for your comment and describing my approach as “fair”.
I should have added that the numbers in the table are AFTER the “certainty to vote” answers and past vote weighting calculations have been made.
On the CR poll I don’t think that Nick is correct to suggest that they only include those surveyed with a 100% certainty of voting. Their published approach is to apply weights to those who give an answer of between 5 and 10 to the certainty to vote question.
I’ve always had my doubts about the, ‘certainty to vote’ question on the day they may not, yet on the day the, ‘uncertains’ may.
The fact we are in the main discussing the problems Cameron is facing rather than the problems Brown is facing, is indicitive of something! The Observer’s take
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/politics/story/0,,2137210,00.html
Good news. This may well explain the large discrepancy between the national polls and the real results in the local and national elections.
13
Ah dear old test, ever the optimist!
Melissa Kite in the Sunday Bellylarf, makes interesting reading.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/07/29/nrcameron129.xml
Cameron is a lazy amateur. He attacks his own party but gives Labour an easy ride. That said…
Southall was not bad. Conservatives marginally improved their share while Labour fell by 10%.
Sedgefield was tactically interesting. Conservatives stood back to transfer votes to the “anyone but Labour Party”
Today, I read that UKIP is withering on the vine.
“Donors gave just £141,000 to the party last year, compared to £1.7 million in 2004. In the first quarter of this year, Ukip received just £34,000.”
Seems to me, Flavour of the month Opinion Polls aside:
1) Labour is losing support
2) Labour has no money to fight an election
3) UKIP voters need a new home
So a word to Conservative members, regarding Cam. “If you are unhappy, tell us. If you are happy someone else”
12. “This may well explain the large discrepancy between the national polls and the real results in the local and national elections. ”
The ruling party usually tends worse in local elections. You can’t just pick up local results alone and compare them to polls. The Tories were leading Labour in 2004 locals, but that didn’t mean that polls showing Lab ahead of the Tories in a GE event were totally wrong
(and btw, if you pick up council byelections held in the last month I think you would find out that Lab % went up in the majority of them compared to last time they were contested)
Lab reselection news. Controversial Lab MP Ann Moffat (East Lothian) survived the trigger ballot but with some considerable opposition. 3 ward braches voted against her automathic reselection, 2 supported her and 1 was a tie. The local Fabian voted against, but the trade union affiliates voted for reselection giving her the majority of branches required
http://www.sundayherald.com/news/heraldnews/display.var.1580600.0.mp_loses_support_of_local_party.php
14 typo So a word to Conservative members, regarding Cam. “If you are unhappy, tell us. If you are happy, tell someone else”
I notice on this board, the Conservative Leader discussion is being undertaken by Socialists.
Tut, tut, tut… you mischievous Socialists.
When you read this in, ‘The Mail on Sunday’ you know somethings up.
http://www.mailonsunday.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=471518&in_page_id=1770
15 - The local Fabian voted against… just the one? then again hardly a heartland of the likes of the Webbs, East Lothian?
16 AMNBH
No doubt they would be pleased to hear from all the Conservatives who predicted Labour’s ratings would decline following Brown’s accession, but they seem to be on holiday.
15 Be interested in your opinion on 85 on the Sean Fear thread I think
[13] That cheered me up, thanks Coldstone - PODWAS (Poor Old Dave, What A Shame) indeed - priceless, that’ll stick around here methinks (well it will if I have owt to do wi’ it…)
I think Labour’s financial position will have some effect on when they go to the polls. They do need some money from somewhere to fight an election.
They might be able to “draw a line” on the debts to an extent, but they would have difficulty paying them off with peerages. Alternatively they need to introduce state finance or get a big bung from the unions.
22 What is your top target in Birmingham these days. Hall Green one would guess
I think you are reading too much into these figures Mike, because your conclusions assume that the recalled vote figures are accurate (or at least, have the same error across each party).
But we know from other evidence that they aren’t - particularly for the Liberal Democrats. That’s why (most) polling companies have to go through various adjustments - because how people said they voted and how they actually voted doesn’t match up very well.
22 John - There are many good reasons why GB is unlikely to go to the polls this autumn, but lack of finance isn’t one of them. Any big Party can raise election funds if necessary. If GB was sure of a big majority, he would have no difficulty in finding Party ’sponsors’.
24. That depends on why there is a mismatch. If it is due to mis-sampling then Mike’s conclusion may well be valid. If it is due to ‘misremembering’, it may not be.
I’ve just scanned yesterday’s thread and was struck by the large number of posters suggesting that a discussion of possible future Tory party leaders was innappropriate / pointless / indicative of bias on Mike’s part.
I notice ‘a man named bolted horse’ returns to that theme today - 14, 16 - and suggests that any such discussion is trouble-making and should be discouraged: “if you’re unhappy tell us”, “tut-tut mischevious socialists”.
This is, of course, nonsense. There were discussions here regarding the Labour party succession for at least a couple of years before the event. Although the circumstances are clearly very different a discussion of the runners and riders for the next ‘Tory leadership challenge cup’ is just what a political better would hope to find here.
I agree with the ever-sensible StJohn who said on yesterday’s thread that there is “zero chance” of Cameron being replaced before the next election. (If one ignores the proverbial bus). Nevertheless, the odds suggest that an early election is a distinct possibility and that when that happens the Tories might lose. At that point - possibly this year - there’s a very good chance that Cameron will be replaced and I for one am interested to consider what might happen at that point rather than ignore the possibility.
re 24. The recalled vote figures ARE with ICM’s adjustment for misrembering and do take account of the certainty to vote.
Fair enough Mike.
9. Ben says: ‘i think it’s a case (as Anthony Wells has suggested) of voters of all kinds projecting their hopes onto a new Prime Minister… I think this is as true of the disaffected “soft left”…’
‘Brown’s done very little substantive to suggest a return to the sort of agenda that would satisfy these disaffected voters of the “soft left”’ … so… ‘then these could well drift away.’
Useful analysis from Ben and I feel confident that this going to happen to some extent.
On the other hand, it’s worth remembering that for some of these ’soft left’ voters it was quite a wrench to admit to themselves that Labour clearly didn’t know what it was doing in the middle-east and it’s policies regarding Iraq and Lebanon were insupportable. Some of these people (including Snowflake and Roger) are desperate to to re-adopt the political allegiances with which they feel most comfortable and return to the Labour fold.
The point is that at least some of the ‘bounce’ is likely to be fairly bankable.
27 That’s pretty much on the money, James F.
StJohn too is about right when he gives the chances of Cameron being replaced before the next election as zero.
Interesting article Mike, and some interesting numbers as well.
I also note that Graham Brady has opened his mouth again. It is a bot of a shame that he could not get more media attention when he was on the front bench. Now he should just shut up.
30 I would in no way regard them as soft left. True their sort maybe bankable, but others will not. Hence my surprise at why GB stuck with ID cards so strong as opposed to kicking it in the long grass. Th majority in favour are unlikely to switch party support over it. The minority against especially crucial Lab to Lib and Lib to Con switchers are. Short term Cameron is on the back foot, longer term I do think this is a strategic misjudgement as Mr Smithson thinks
22 There aren’t many good reasons why GB won’t go this autumn. There’s only one: because he doesn’t feel confident, having examined all the evidence, that he’ll win with a decent working majority.
Set against that is the large risk of allowing a Tory Party which is on the ropes time to recover. I have a feeling that a certain amount of Labour hubris is setting in even among intelligent Labour posters like Nick; that DC’s image is ‘terminally tarnished’ with the voters. This is the ‘Neil Kinnock’ scenario; Major didn’t go early because of the Gulf War and his wish not to exploit it but got away with the delay because of the weakness of the Opposition leader and the lack of credibility of their policies(ie Shadow Budget unravelling).
If that is true of course it doesn’t matter whether GB goes this October or in May next year; he’d likely win either time. Personally I think such posters underestimate DC’s courage and resilience; he’s perfectly capable of bouncing back if Labour are foolish enough to give him the opportunity to do so.
There is also another substantial risk. With every passing quarter the argument that this is a ‘new Government’ will be harder to sustain. Old problems caused by old mistakes will rear up their ugly heads and guess what GB was the man on the watch in every case. This will be particularly evident if he passes up October because GB will find it hard to keep up the frenetic pace of new announcements throughout the whole of the first quarter of 2008. And if the Government ceases to set the agenda the vacuum will be filled by bad news stories and the Opposition. Also the Press will happily switch targets if they’re given time to get bored by DC bashing.
If he passes up a 6-7 point lead this autumn what will he do if it’s down to 3% in the Spring? All DC has to do is achieve a hung Parliament; the bar for GB is much higher. It’s quite possible that he’ll be driven to going long because he bottled his big chance this autumn. That completely runs counter to his strategy of presenting himself as a ‘new ‘ PM running a ‘new’ administration.
Everything points GB in the direction of an early election. Polls permitting, of course, the earlier the better. Mike talks about GB wanting to be ‘absolutely sure’. That’s absurd. He never will be. Either he passes up a big lead this autumn( if it still exists in September!); a huge risk IMHO; or he he goes for it while the tide is with him.
On the question of Mike’s customary point about 2005 voters, I agree with poster 1 that we have to factor in the Labour Iraq war abstainers from 2005. Also I thought punters were notoriously unreliable about remembering who they voted for. It seems incredible to anoraks that that could be so but apparently it is.
However if Mike’s right we should junk the opinion polls and do a new calculation each time based solely on Lab/Con/LD 2005 self declared voters. Personally I doubt we’d get a more accurate answer. I’d welcome Anthony Wells/ ICM or other pollsters deal with Mike’s point. If he’s right it affects all their findings.
30 Again I have to agree James F and your point has imprtant betting implications.
Yesterday I sold off half my stake in Labour seats at a decent profit. The reason was that I just couldn’t see Labour making much advance on its current position, not for some while at least. I expect no sharp movement in the polls but rather a slow convergence until the Conference season, when things should live n up again. No point in sitting on a large unrealised profit, so it made sense to cash in some of the chips.
As usual, I was working intuitively. Your posts give good reasons in support.
27 Agree, we’re all being Captain Sensible this am, must be ‘cos its Sunday.
One of the big changes over the last few years, probably becuase of the increasing cynicism of the electorate, is the so called Tory Press. Twenty years ago, the Torygraph,Mail,Express,Sun, etc, gave unwavering support to the Tory Party, and it was taken for granted. Now even the Tory press has to be convinced, it is obvious, by reading them over the last few days, they are not! The Tory press were a very valuable weapon in the Tory party’s armoury, I’m not saying they are vital, to the Tory Party’s ability to win a GE, but not having them on side, does make harder for them to win. It may not have been, The Sun what won it’ but it certainly helped.
18. Ben”The local Fabian voted against… just the one?”
from local press reports it seems there was just one Fabian club in East Lothian. Did you expect more Fabian clubs in EL CLP?
32 A forlorn hope Benedict. Brady has committed political self immolation, and that must be all the harder to bear as his career looked bright up to that point. He has no incentive to shut up and every incentive to undermine your Leader, to get his career back on the rails. The only person with residual power over him is his Constituency Party, and presumably they as Bagehot remarked still don’t understand DC cannot always say things they would like him to say, and sometimes has to say things they rather he wouldn’t say to win. I think you, in your target seat? are stuffed at the moment wrt to Mr Brady
I have just read last night’s thread, where cymrumark said that his party had achieved increases of 10-12% in Conwy and Llanelli between the GEs of 1997 and 2001. Guto Bebb in post 245 accused him of telling lies with these figures. The percentages were as follows:
Llanelli 1997 19.0%
Llanelli 200130.9%
Conwy 1997 6.8%
Conwy
36 Coldstone - I seriously wonder to what extent people are led these days by The Press. Forums like this are taking over.
I have just read last night’s thread, where cymrumark said that his party had achieved increases of 10-12% in Conwy and Llanelli between the GEs of 1997 and 2001. Guto Bebb in post 245 accused him of telling lies with these figures. The percentages were as follows:
Llanelli 1997 19.0%
Llanelli 2001 30.9%
Conwy 1997 6.8%
Conwy 2001 16.5%
This is an increase of 11.9% in Llanelli and 9.7% in Conwy. Given some rounding, cymrumark’s figures of 10-12% are correct.
(Please ignore post 39 - I pressed the button too soon).
Re 38, Punter I don’t live in a target seat, it is Conservative and fairly safe (Mid Sussex). However I do live in a target country! Hence being irritated by Brady. You are right that his constituency association needs to reign him in but probably won’t.
7. Disraeli: “Some of those disaffected voters who have returned to the Labour fold must have been hoping for a change in Britains relationship with the US, now that ‘poodle’ Blair has gone. Not so, it seems. On his visit to Washington, the Prime Minister said:
“And because of the values we share, the relationship with the United States is not only strong but can become stronger in the years ahead.””
Disraeli, no one is expecting the UK to break off relations with the United States. What would be the sense in upsetting an entire nation when Bush is a lame duck with only 18 months to go and we will very likely have a Dem in the White House next? It would be childish in the extreme. And Americans are tribal - Dems tend to get as upset as anti-Americanism as Republicans. America is a big reality much like China is - we can’t afford to publicly offend either. What we are hoping for is that Brown does a Harold Wilson - plenty of public assurances of friendship with the USA, but obstructing being drawn into further mad schemes. (And Gordon brown is v good at obstruction - only look at how he dealt with the euro).
30. JamesF “it’s worth remembering that for some of these ’soft left’ voters it was quite a wrench to admit to themselves that Labour clearly didn’t know what it was doing in the middle-east and it’s policies regarding Iraq and Lebanon were insupportable. Some of these people (including Snowflake and Roger) are desperate to to re-adopt the political allegiances with which they feel most comfortable and return to the Labour fold.”
Spot on, JamesF. You are right about it being a wrench. I can’t describe how upset I was at the time. But practically as soon as I left the polling station I was feeling guilt and voter’s remorse for not voting Labour, and stayed up all night to get the result for my constituency to make sure I hadn’t let in a Tory. So the process of coming back to Labour started as soon as the cathartic business of making my protest was over. I expect those who did let in Tories by splitting the vote felt dreadful. And all are hoping for a restoration of things as they were before Blair went neo-con.
Two good posts James F. (Did you disappear for a while?)
I’m sure this thread is a sop to some very miserable Tories who threatened to disappear after yesterday’s thread so I won’t make a comment on it. I can’t understand the point that’s being made anyway and I hope Mike doesn’t renege on naming the Tory Mr X!
As for returning Labour voters I think this is THE important factor. I was the ONLY Labour voter I knew who admitted they had voted Labour last time(and that was with Michael Howard!). All the rest had gone Lib Dem Green or abstained in roughly that order.
Remember the polls had Labour well ahead until the last week when Iraq surfaced so even if only most came back that still would give them quite a lead.
Remember also that after the election Labour had the perfect storm-Lebanon-Prescott-Cherie B-back bench revolt-Blair slowly disappearing up GB’s backside-cash for Coronets-botched reshuffle etc.
My guess is that the Tories poll gloom is nothing to do with grammar schools by elections or Rwanda but just a return to the status quo.
P.S. Patrick - I hope you get better soon
40
The only people who use forums like this are sad people like us.
The press effect is subliminal, it creates an impression, often without detail, once that impression sticks its almost impossible to erase. Kinnock suffered from this, terms like, ‘Welsh Windbag’ helped to destroy him, he didn’t help himself, he couldn’t help being Welsh, (I’m half Welsh) but he was inclined to ‘go on a bit’. Funny Heseltine who is also Welsh, from Swansea, only a few miles from where Kinnock comes from, nobody ever thinks of as Welsh, ditto Sir Geoffery Howe.
34 Reasons for not going in 2007, Blue Moon? Well, off the cuff, let’s see what I could come up with if I were GB.
1. Only one double digit poll lead
]
2. Summer polls notoriously unreliable
3. Bounce factor probably temporary and would wither away in Election spotlight
4. Don’t want to be shortest office holder ever
5. Early election might look opportunitistic
6. Have some things I’m desperate to get done before an election
7. Constituencies not geared up for election
8. Little sign public wants an election
9. Sounds reasonable to give public a chance to see how I’m doing after, say, one year
10. I’m scared! [Well, no I’m not really but it helps me if my opponents think I am.
This is not to say you do not make some valid points, or even that he will not go early. He’ll go if he’s confident of winning clearly, sure enough, but I did say ‘many reasons’, and there’s ten without trying too hard!
Btw, I counted no less than eight paragraphs in your post. This must be a new personal best.
Well done!
Re Brown and Bush Andrew Rawsnley has a characeristically funny and perceptive piece in the Observer. By the way I own with shame that I don’t know how to post links on this site. Can someone advise me how to do so?
48
Just right click select copy return to this site hit paste
Peter the Punter I could answer all of those weak points in spades but I’ll restrict myself to basking in your approbation of my paragraphing! It won’t last.
41 VB also accused you of telling lies on Hospitals in Llanelli, and letting the Tories in in PS&CW. Although the latter saw a big Tory swing that can’t be ascribed to that you would have thought. Any views
40 LOL Coldstone!
Yes, maybe.
Coldstone
Ditto Michael Howard, of course, whose peculiar speech is sometimes described as a “Welsh accent”. Certainly, living in Llanelli for a while, where Howard grew up, I never heard anyone speak like that!
Reasons for no election for at least a year.
1. It would appear opportunistic.
2. It will take at least 8 months for voters to understand what a Brown government will be like. It would be dishonest to call an election before then.
47. Does someone want to have a go at compiling ten reasons why Tories don’t want an early poll?
The ICM figures shown by Mike give switches from major parties to Others but not vice versa so they are incomplete .
The Yougov detailed figures for their latest poll are on the website . Some of the breakdown figures are strange even given the small sample sizes . They have LibDems in Scotland at just 4% which is unbelievable and compares with the latest comparable Mori figure of 17% .
42 Good to hear that you are complacent in Mid Sussex , Benedict and you consider the constituency fairly safe . As the LibDems outpolled the Conservatives in the May locals and Conservative support nationally has fallen since then , it looks pretty unsafe to me .
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,2137060,00.html. Bingo it works, I think. The Rawnsley article.
Re 55, Snowflake, No, but I can give you 1, that is that we would like a bit more time to chip away at Gordon and his image.
Roger your forecast of no early election will have been noted by Peter the P. The Labour seats total will be rising as we speak!
Re 56, Mark Senior, “42 Good to hear that you are complacent in Mid Sussex , Benedict and you consider the constituency fairly safe . As the LibDems outpolled the Conservatives in the May locals and Conservative support nationally has fallen since then , it looks pretty unsafe to me .”
Did they? We took more seats of the Liberal Democrats than they did from us, and where the Lib dems won seats was in wards not in the parliamentary constituency like Crawley Down and Hassocks. I have not carried out a detailed breakdown, but I would also point out that whilst the LD’s won the council in 1995, they have not come close to winning at parliamentary level at all.
The reason is that on the ground we are not complacent.
There £70 free money available on the spreads.
Buy Labour seats £20 at 314.5 with Cantor and sell at 318 with Sporting Index.
There is £70 free money available on the spreads.
Buy Labour seats £20 at 314.5 with Cantor and sell at 318 with Sporting Index.
33. ID cards will be unpopular and expensive. (And, as an aside, I’m totally unclear as to what they are expected to achieve). But I think their impact will be limited. People will buy them as their passports expire - that’s to say slowly over the next 10 years - and this will avoid the build-up of too much pressure.
Snowflake, Roger, coldstone, PtP - some of the grandees of pb.com - all noticing my witterings. Very flattering but you’re all left-leaning so I’m clearly not showing enough balance!
You asked if I’ve been somewhere Roger. I’ve never previously been an established presence on the board although I have posted occassionally over the past couple of years. Normally I lurk. I’m really not sure why I’m temporarily out of the shadows.
59 BM.(I was worried about that!)
51 Punter
Thanks for your ref to Valley Boy’s comment re - Hospitals in Llanelli. Not being currently in Llanelli or having read detail, I cannot say one way or the other whether “lies” were involved by either “side” in this debate. What I do know is that when i was fighting llanelli Assembly seat for Lib Dems in 1999, we used the strong rumours coming out (being carefully leaked) that the parlous finances of the former Dyfed Powys Health Authority had affected its successors to such an effect that major cuts were on the cards. We ran a campaign on ensuring we kept the A&E at Prince Philip Hospital - and of course, were accused of scaremongering for our pains! But for then it was kept, and I still believe the Lib Dems received some good support based on that very campaign.
56. Interesting exchange of views on Lib Dem prospets in Wales on Sean Fear’s thread if you care to chip in your two penny worth
58 The Times the New Labour ible also insists no election before next year at earliest. They and the Sun will not take kindly to being made fools of, if GB did unlikely decide to go this year
Benedict
Mid Sussex. 1.5% swing to LDs in 2005. Now within 6% swing range - this is by no means distant (compare when Ludlow was won on I think, a 8.5% swing). LDs have kept same candidate, always a good sign!
Coldstone the important article in the Telegraph today is not the usual Kite flying but Gisela Stuart’s article that is headlined:
If Brown won’t listen, how can we trust him?
Her views were mentioned previously but they are now in a national newspaper as a challenge to Brown to step up and be seen to stick to his promises.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2007/07/29/do2902.xml
67 What is you Constituency now
51 & 65. VB did not accuse me of telling lies about hospitals - Guto Bebb accused cymrumark of telling lies about voting swings and I wrote to point out that GB was wrong and cymrumark’s figures were correct.
I believe that the issue of hospital reconfiguration was a major issue in the recent Assembly elections, especially in the South-West and along the North Wales coast, where Labour suffered five of their six lost seats.
The proposals in the North included closing several hospitals and downgrading Llandudno Hospital and all the then opposition parties opposed this. I believe that Labour’s response was inept - initially supporting the reconfiguration, then joining in the protests against the policy and finally asserting that the hospitals were never under threat and that the opposition parties were lying.
I am pleased to see that the new “One Wales” coalition government has promised to “agree and implement a new approach to health service reconfiguration. We will institute a moratorium on existing proposals for changes at community hospital level. We undertake that changes in District General Hospital services will not be implemented unless and until associated community services are in place.”
I think that that was more or less what the then opposition parties were calling for and I do not agree with Labour’s assertion that the opposition parties were lying.
Witan. Interesting Frank Field one day Gisela Stuart the next. When will Kate Hoey make her appearance? But will DC really promise to unravel an international agreement after it has been ratified by the UK Parliament?
It’s one thing to promise a referendum if the Treaty hasn’t been ratified by the time of the GE but that’s not enough for the hard line eurosceptics, it seems.
“You” as in PC. I thought you were a PC man
68. Ironic that the same day Brady lays into Cameron Stewart lays into Brown. If you read Cambell’s book you realize how ambitious MP’s can be and how Machiavelian they can be if their ambition is thwarted.
61,62 Peter given this is on 2 different spread firms it might be a long wait to get the £70 back
71. You and your fellow European Movement quislings obviously hope not. No debate, no choice - perfect.
73. I think the thing about MPs is that there’s several hundred of them in Parliament, and despite what they say, they entered with the hope of one day getting a top job in their party. Seeing that theres only about a dozen good jobs to go round, there’s going to be a lot of failed ambition. Even if only 10% of them become spiteful about it, thats still a big number to goto the media.
Sasha Do you really regard those people who disagree with you on europe as traitors to this country? The word quisling has a very powerful historical meaning. The treaty will be subject to rigorous debate in both Houses of Parliament whatever happens.
An early election is a must for Brown, I thought that he couldn’t do anything but call one. Having reconsidered, although he must call one I don’t think he will as he is not psychologically prepared for it.
The real difficulty that Brown has, and that most don’t realise, is that he has a supportive press. He does not communicate ideas well and the press are covering this flaw up at the moment, doing his work for him. When they do start to attack (as they inevitably will as the shine wears off) he will be on his own. A leader who can take the press on, as Blair did, is a necessity, Brown will suffer when this happens.
74 jgc
If you wait until the GE, it is a pure arb. You must win £70 on the day. Technically the money is locked up, but in practice it matters little. One side of the arb will be positive, so you can draw on the credit to make other plays.
Alternatively, you can just wait until the prices of the two firms level out - or better still, reverse - and cash your chips in then.
Btw, the prices have moved a little, but it’s still an arb.
76. Reading AC’s diaries for ‘94 Margaret Beckett is very upset that she hasn’t been given one of the top four jobs Cooke wants to be shadow chancellor and Mo Mowlem thinks NI is beneath her! Prescott’s deal for supporting the dropping of clause 4 seems to a super ministry though I’m only up to page 40 so I’m not certain yet. It’s the best soap in town!
Ben I am sure you are right that a lot of the poll change recently is the British thing about giving the new man a chance.
The challenge for Labour is how Brown intends to hang on to those people once he is no longer the new man in, say, six months time.
He has a big underlying problem in that he is not really a new man and the constant refrain of the Blair years about the actions of previous Tory governments will now be directed at Brown. Can he disown the Blair years of war and cronyism.
Brown has been quite effective in his first spin cycle. But he has used up much of his ready locker of announcements almost all of which have been for reviews and consultations rather than immediate action. Those like DESO which are for immediate action have already caused trouble.
Some of them will cause internal tensions as the Manchester lobby stuggles to keep the super casino, the border force is a weak spot as it isn’t what it is billed to be and even the aircraft carriers where the majority of the work (whenever it actually starts) goes to Scottish yards in a touch of pork barrel politics, leaves the rest of the navy rather hard up and Portsmouth with redundancies.
The terrorism legislation will have resonance in much of the population but even in his own party he might find it difficult to persuade MPs that there is not a better way than 56 days internment for suspects.
He dare not turn tail in Iraq or Afghanistan or spurn the American alliance so the anti war lobby will be increasingly disillusioned, the debt mountain in British households might lead to a rather flat Christmas, and the issue of trust surrounding the referendum issue will not go away as Blair found before him.
He has done the easy bit, now it gets harder as the announcements need action and out-turns and the tough lines on policy have to be pushed through and maintained.
He certainly gets more time if he can win a snap election as the problems will either be still hidden or can be painted over temporarily in the hope that it can all be sorted out over the five years of the next parliament (the John Major gambit).
Or he can wait and with every day risk at least some of the chickens clucking home.
One bad sign is that several news outlets are now sometimes saying, each time they report a death in a combat zone, that this is the n-th soldier killed since operations started. If this becomes a norm then the numbers will take on a power of their own.
In short this Tory sees the greatest risk to our winning the next election as a snap poll while people are still giving Brown the benefit of the doubt. But with one caveat, if he does go in October he might end his own honeymoon with the electorate as people don’t seem to like unnecessary elections even when they have told pollsters that there ought to be one.
Incidentally Brady’s attack on Cameron is one of the leading stories on all BBC news. I haven’t heard the Gisela Stuart story except on here. Is this a mark of BBC bias or is Brady more significant than Stuart? I suppose he makes up .5% of Cameron’s MP’s she’s only .28% of Brown’s!!
50 Blue Moon
Yes I’m sure you could. I never said they were strong points, just that there were a lot of them if you are looking.
There’s little disagreement between us really, just slightly different shades of opinion.
I am very happy to leave it there on this pleasant Sunday, especially in view of the progress now being made on the matter of paragraphing.
Enjoy the day.
70 Padarn
Sorry, Padarn, I did not say that VB had accused you of “lies” over hospitals. I merely referred to VB’s comment about Plaid’s progress being partly down to “lies” over hospitals. I wasn’t referring there to you or your views, or comments at all. I also said I did not know whether either side had been involved in “lies”.
Witan Fascinating piece about the imminent British pull back from Basra. That’s where the casualties are coming from in the most part. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/29/world/middleeast/29basra.html?ref=world
77. Ah, Europe. Delightful!
Blue Moon I think you should come clean and admit what you want - i.e. further integration - perhaps ending in a Federal Europe, or somewhere similar. You must want this because that is where Europe is heading, inevitably - towards a quasi-superstate, or a non-imperial empire, as Barosso calls it (he thinks we are already there).
After all Europe already has a currency, a parliament, a civil service, a government, a legal system, a supreme court, a body of law, a capital, an anthem, a flag, a foreign policy, an agricultural policy, a trade policy, a fisheries policy, and a central bank, and a military headquarters.
Soon, thanks to the Constitution, it will have a permanent president, a diplomatic corps, a sports policy, a culture policy, a single asylum policy, a single visa policy, a single extradition policy, its own taxes, a nascent army, a public prosecutor, and a European FBI able to arrest people across Europe.
Now you obviously think all this is OK. And that is a perfectly respectable opinion to have (though a highly unusual opinion for a “Tory”).
The trouble is that in Britain the people who are pro-European, and who want all the above, tend to be highly secretive about all this, and simply claim that “oh we’re just pooling a bit of sovereignty, no serious powers have been handed over”, blah blah blah. They do this because they know full well that the British people, if asked, would reject most or all of the above.
It’s this blatant and increasingly desperate deception that is now coming back to haunt them - and us.
So. The time has come for people like you to admit what you want, and exactly where Europe is going; the time is ripe for people like me to stop ranting and give a coherent argument why I think absorption into a “non-imperial empire” is bad for Britain.
On the tiny matter of DC’s attitude, yes of course it would be perfectly permissible for him to renegotiate the Constitution if and when a Treaty has already been signed. Indeed the pressure on him to do so would be intense and irresistible, from all members and MPs (apart from the few like you). So it would happen.
handled badly this could escalate http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/6920895.stm
28. Mike S - if this is correct, can you explain:
ICM weighted base above:
Con 141, Lab 165
GE actual:
Con 33%, Lab 36%
But:
(33/36) * 165 = 151.
So there should be 151 Con voters in the weighted base but there are only 141. So they are including fewer Con supporters in the weighted base, presumably to allow for mis-remembering.
It apppears that if you have fewer Con supporters in the weighted base then you can get the bizarre situation of a Lab to Con swing (as above) but still an overall result of the Lab lead rising (even without any effect from people who didn’t vote for a main Party last time - I appreciate there is also this affect above).
seanT. While I am no means a pro-European surely having a common asylum policy would be a good thing for Britain. Right now we take a far greater number of asylum seekers than anywhere else in Europe. A common policy would surely mean dealing them out more fairly, and thus reducing the level coming into Britain.
86 I have always read your posts on europe and on occasion replied with detailed comments. You never extend the same courtesy to any poster with whom you disagree preferring to dismiss their arguments with cop outs like ‘piffle’. So I won’t bother with replying in future. There’s no point.
So, fromt eh polls we can reasonably premuse that Brown is picking up some votes, but as everyone in our great democracy knows, some votes matter more than others and it’s little use in picking up the wrong ones.
In other words people in Labour heartlands who abstained in 2005 or voted Lib Dem and are now switching back. But how many Lib Dem seats do Labour hope to win at the next election. 10? The real danger for Labour is the direct switch from Labour to Conservative. Brown should be fully focused on hanging on to those who came over in ‘97, whereas those who have since deserted the party are less relevant.
Entirely off topic here, but why the hell is the US making a huge arms deal with Saudi Arabia? What are they hoping to achieve? Did they not learn anything from bin Ladin and Hussein turning against them previously? The current US administration really is the worst of all time, just monumentally stupid.
90. You do not reply because, of course, you are embarrassed by the truth of the central assertion: you want further integration into Europe without a referendum, ergo you are happy to see our absorption into the “empire”.
Like I say, I respect this point of view, in terms. It is arguable that in a world of megapowers like China, India and the USA, we need to be part of a larger “empire”. I don’t agree - but I can just about see the logic.
I simply think the British should be consulted before this country is subsumed. You do not think the British people should be consulted. And that is all we need to know. Now indeed we can stop arguing.
89. Yes I see yr point, however - I’ve read the Treaty! - I don’t see anything in it to stop what already happens - countries allowing asylum seekers to pass across their territory into other countries. Asylum seekers will still head for English-speaking Britain, across France.
As ever we will sign up to something European that sounds good, but in reality we might end up with a pretty bad deal.
91.”In other words people in Labour heartlands who abstained in 2005 or voted Lib Dem and are now switching back. But how many Lib Dem seats do Labour hope to win at the next election. 10?”
The thing is that LD gains from Lab in 2005 weren’t in Lab traditional heartlands but mainly in former Con (80’s) then Lab (90’s) and now LD (00s) areas
A few observations on those ICM figures -
Men are significantly more likely to vote than women.
Current labour identifiers are even less likely to vote than those who voted labour in 2005, they also lose out to both tories and lib dems on this matter.
65+ voters are, as usual, much more likely to vote than anyone else.
Labour support boosted significantly by the female vote.
Large labour lead for C1 voters.
UKIP voters are nearly all pensioners.
Labour voters who like the leader and the party are much more likely to be aged 18-24.
Northern voters are considerably less likely to want a general election within the next year.
I have too much time on my hands…..
those aged 18-24 don’t vote.
Anecdotal stuff I know…
Spoke to my aunt yesterday - a lifelong Tory member, now well into her 80s. She and her “mates” are a bit miffed at Cameron. For a start, none of them buy into this global warming stuff.
There must be an element within the Tory party membership who are “global warming” deniers… does anybody know how widespread this element is?
Padern/Punter/Tim
Have replied to Guto on the other thread. I think he may be sleep deprived or suffering from a late night in Llandudno Tory club. Not only did he accuse me of telling lies but he appeared to claim Dafydd Wigley had rejected an approach from Aberconwy Tories to stand for them. if thats true(rather than the typo i suspect) I imagine Guto is feeling quite hurt
Valley boy is an idiot and not worth responding to.
Padarn thanks for the facts
91 94 I think Labour will be hoping to win back LD votes in the Lab/Con and, if Nick is to be believed, the Con/Lab marginals. In many if not most of these seats the LD vote went up 2-3 points or so last time( including in the South) hurting Labour in the process.
Presumably GB will be hoping that those voters who refused to use Polly Toynbee’s suggestion of voting with a ‘clothes peg’ over their noses may come back post TB. In addition others who abstained because of Iraq may also come back.
If the Tories stay still or only rise marginally from last time GB could still hope to win handily on the back of returning abstainers and LD voters who come back ‘home’.
As to posters’ comments on regional variations I doubt the regional sub samples are worth a row of beans; they’re just too small. Labour did poorly everywhere in the 2007 local elections which anyway aren’t a very good guide to the GE; eg Labour wins in 2001 and 2005 GEs after poor local elections. That said did Labour do even worse in the locals in the South than they did before the 2005 GE or about the same?
97. I think many of the inhabitants of Britain are, this summer, “global warming deniers”. Especially those in Gloucestershire.
93. PS I see some people are floating the idea of a privately funded referendum on the Constitution - if Brown insists on breaking his promise.
This could cause real difficulty for Labour, if it is properly organised. The Daily Mail had a cod referendum, of their own, before the last Constitution volte-face - more than a million voted. I’m sure that figured in Blair’s about-turn.
If all parties come together and get behind the project - the newspapers, the Tories, the Lib Dems, and Open Europe, plus the trade unions and the electoral reform society (whose idea it is) - we could see quite a few million people voting.
Say 5m? More? That’s very very hard to ignore. Almost impossible, I would have thought.
New thread - YouGov boost for Boris in London
100 - SeanT - “I think many of the inhabitants of Britain are, this summer, “global warming deniers”. ..Especially those in Gloucestershire.”
As I understand it, Sean, the prediction is that the warming will cause more ice to break off the Northern icecaps. They will float south and push the Gulf Stream further south. This in turn will cause the UK to become cooler, and, I think, wetter.
One of the paradoxes of GW then is that weather in the UK will get significantly worse.
If GW is true, of course.
100 - my aunt’s view is that the whole global warming thing is a hoax, which was popularised by Bliar to detract from the carnage in Iraq.
98 Regarding your swing in Llanelli. How much you attribute to the old battleaxe HMJ personally
92. What the US is getting from the arms deal is a shot in the arm for the American defense industry. Might as well keep tapping the Saudis before their oil production goes into terminal decline (or at least before this becomes apparent to one and all).
Besides, a lot of people in this adminstration are going to need jobs in 18 months or so. What’s a little thing like massive regional instability when it comes to getting that second house in Nantucket?
“Global warming” would be better termed “global storming”, orbetter still climate change. As far as I can tell most people reluctant accept that there are some shifts in climate
Sigh, start again. No just ignore that. Don’t know why it suddenly posted.
As for ignoring 5 million people, nearly 6 million people voted Lib Dem. Run it past me again. What influence do they exert?
104. In all honesty I dont know. Iw was in line with the seats we targeted though so I think the improved campaiging techniques we used are more important than the personalities of the candidates.
108 Interesting had it been a big personal, that would have worth bearing in mind for Westminster
41
padarn, you are also being very economical with my post which acknowledged a bounce in Conwy between 1997 and 2001 and stated that this was due in no small part to the lower than normal Plaid vote in 1997. I said that the figures from 1992 and 1987 would give a better indication of the ‘bounce’ achieved in Conmwy as a result of the election of a Plaid AM in 1999. 1997 was a clasic fourth party squeeze in Conwy with both Lib Dems and Labour raiding the Plaid vote with some success. 16% in 2001 was an increase of around 4% on the long-term core Plaid vote in the Conwy constituency - a core vote which re-established itself at the 2005 GE.
Even with your decision to quote only part of my response to Cymrumark you fail to show that my claim that his comments were on the optimistic side were incorrect.
98
Cymrumark, the comment about DW rejecting an offer to stand in Aberconwy came from the man himself. Are you calling Dafydd a liar?
110 The only part of your post that I mentioned was your allegation that cymrumark was lying when he said that his party had achieved an increase of 10-12% in the vote in Conwy and Llanelli between 1997 and 2001. It did. He was not lying.
112.
But Padarn, by choosing to quote only a small part of my response to Cymrumark are you not being selective with the truth? And even on your figures (which ignore the point I was making about the long term position of Plaid in the former Conwy constituency) the increase in Conwy was not between 10% and 12%.
The implication of the post from Cymrumark was that there was a benefit of 10-12% for Plaid as a result of having an AM elected in 1999. I dispute this in Conwy since it ignores the very real tactical voting by Plaid supporters in 1997 which saw the Plaid vote (stable at around 10% to 12% for two decades prior to 1997) collapse to 7%. The recovery in 200 was attributable to Plaid supporters returning to the fold (very many had voted for Roger Roberts in 1997) and a bounce of around 4% as a result of the election of a Plaid AM.
Guto
I was not seeking to ignore your point but responding to you calling me a liar which was abit over the top. If you have managed to find some lIb dems in Anglesey good look to you…they are few and far between
On the Wigley pint i think I have answered that. he may have had individuals approach and he may have declined to stand hardly surprising ore a mark of desperation.
Clearly he was scared I would beat him in a hustings….perhaps he will change his mind now I have said I am not standing
“Wigley pint” Has he launched his own brand of beer? On the next Election I can see you on 5 on a good day. The three now plus Ceredigion and Ynys Mon. Possibly 6 on a stonking day Llanelli,but very unlikely IMHO. Am I missing any others? I know Aberconwy but we’ll have to disagree. BTW You going to Vale of Clwyd again
The ‘others’ line at the bottom shows 1/1/5. This tends to support the theory that labour loses membership to the BNP at around 5:1:1 compared to Lib Dem and Conservative.
BNP are claiming ballot box tampering at Sedgefield as is another candidate. The postal voting system is also being questioned again.
Canvas returns at Sedgefield put BNP at nearer 18% than the 9% awarded at the count. If true that puts turnout up to nearer 50%, down 12 points, not the slightly ludicrous 20 points reduction that was reported.
I must use my glasses when reading these tiny charts! Looks like Lib Dem at 5%. sorry!
Re 67 Tim13, “Mid Sussex. 1.5% swing to LDs in 2005. Now within 6% swing range - this is by no means distant (compare when Ludlow was won on I think, a 8.5% swing). LDs have kept same candidate, always a good sign!”
I think you saw quite some swing away in the 2007 locals which is what I was talking about.
114 - As it happens I get on well with a Lib Dem councillor from Ynys Môn and also a former agent for the party on the island. The same comments have been made by two Labour members from Holyhead and numerous Plaid supporters / members from the Llangefni area.
They all appear to have a rather negative view of your chosen candidate who was, as I stated in my original comment, chosen before the Assembly election. IWJ did very well in May and perhaps a more interesting field of candidates would have been attracted if the selection had been held back until after the May result.
I fail to see why reporting the comments of party members and supporters from Plaid, Lab and LD is childish.
As for Wigley, I have a strong feeling that you are either;
a) Under playing the fact that he was approached due to his rejection of the overtures
b) Not in the loop in Aberconwy to the extent that you claim
As for liar, in the light of day I am happy to accept that it was OTT on my behalf BUT I do believe that your attempt to prove a 10% - 12% uplift for Plaid in Conwy as a result of the 1999 victory of Gareth Jones was also seriously OTT! I think that any reasonable analysis of the Plaid vote in Conwy since the 1980’s would confirm that the actual benefit enjoyed by Plaid in 2001 was no more that 4%.
7.”the letters were written over a month ago, before DC’s recent troubles. I wonder why, and also wonder why the 1922 committee decided to release the information only recently.
Off on holiday for a week - so long everyone.”
Have a nice relaxing holiday and I hope the weather is kind.
Nick, I stand to be corrected but I think that I read somewhere that the letters were almost certainly sent more than a month before and I would agree with Alex@8 on the reasons why.
“5 - I think the reason he was “overlooked” was because of the timing issue identified in 4. The press spin on the letters was that Cameron was in serious trouble because they were a response to the plummeting polls and poor by-election results.
When in fact they were almost certainly prompted by disquiet over the non-issue of grammar schools.”
I am absolutely sure that is the case and therefore that sour grapes were in abundance at that time. Now the political picture is different and therefore I think the mood in the party that is now a non story. BTW, I think that Brady has done himself no favours this weekend and even if his constituency party don’t respond I hope others within the party do.
34. An excellent and I think extremely insightful post from Bluemoon, I agree with why Brown should go early but remain to be convinced that he either planned and therefore has the courage to do so unless all his little ducks are lined up and quacking loudly.
120. Should have added that and I stand to be corrected it was not the 1922 committee who released this information but rather an individual who was maybe miffed that it had not got into the public domain. In fact I don’t even think that it was ever confirmed that any letters had been written hence the rather odd figure of 2-6 letters.
A bit more awake this morning - how does this poll stack up with other voting intention polls. The above shows Cameron gaining votes from Labour and Lib Dem at double the rate he is losing 2005 Conservatives. It shows Labour losing twice as many 2005 voters as it is gaining.
For Brown to be 8% ahead, he must have found an extraordinary number of previous non-voters to become interested in supporting him. I find it hard to see how this poll and other polls stack up.